Restarting HS2a

[TomTankEngine]

On Newsnight tonight it was reported that Rachel Reeves will say on Wednesday that HS2a to Crewe won't go ahead. The reasons given being 1. The Chiltern tunnels spent all the money and 2. The land has been sold. Not sure either of these is exactly true, but it's what Nick Robinson said she told a meeting of Labour MPs.

Apologies - I don't have a link. In any event the actual speech is in 2 days.

In just don't understand why you wouldn't do 2a.

They have no problem with pointing the finger at the previous government, so just say while building to Manchester is still too expensive, Crewe is a relatively affordable no brainer which is key to getting phase 1 to work and rishi sunak cancelled it without doing research or understanding how it actually works, for short term political reasons

 

[Peter Sarf]

In just don't understand why you wouldn't do 2a.

They have no problem with pointing the finger at the previous government, so just say while building to Manchester is still too expensive, Crewe is a relatively affordable no brainer which is key to getting phase 1 to work and rishi sunak cancelled it without doing research or understanding how it actually works, for short term political reasons

I have a horrible feeling (fear) the reason is that the country's finances are in a lot worse state than we care to imagine ?.

One thing that I wonder about HS2 Phase 2a is that there do not seem to be so many local objections to it compared to Phase 1 ?.

 

[TomTankEngine]

I have a horrible feeling (fear) the reason is that the country's finances are in a lot worse state than we care to imagine ?.

One thing that I wonder about HS2 Phase 2a is that there do not seem to be so many local objections to it compared to Phase 1 ?.

Because the sheep and cows living across 30 miles through some fields aren't able to object

 

[Palmerston]

In just don't understand why you wouldn't do 2a.

They have no problem with pointing the finger at the previous government, so just say while building to Manchester is still too expensive, Crewe is a relatively affordable no brainer which is key to getting phase 1 to work

This is what seems so illogical. The hard work of building huge brand new stations in London and Birmingham is done; building tunnels under London, Chilterns and Birmingham is done; making arrangements to buy all the necessary land is done. Just build another 50-odd miles of track!

 

[HSTEd]

In just don't understand why you wouldn't do 2a.

They have no problem with pointing the finger at the previous government, so just say while building to Manchester is still too expensive, Crewe is a relatively affordable no brainer which is key to getting phase 1 to work and rishi sunak cancelled it without doing research or understanding how it actually works, for short term political reasons

Because before cancellation, even HS2 admitted to a cost of up to £7bn, it will be above £10bn by the time it is built now. And that's if we assume HS2's costings are generally accurate, and I doubt there is much faith in that in government.

From Birmingham to York:

Birmingham - Mcr 40mins.
Manchester-Leeds 30mins.
Leeds - York 15mins.
Dwell at Manchester and Leeds total 5-10mins.

Total: 90-95 mins
Current best: Birmingham- York 113mins

So it easily wins versus the classic train.
If you look at the ODM data it is clear that you have to go very far down the destination list for York before you get a station south west of Birmingham. I haven't tried it for the other stations beyond York but I can't imagine it will be much different.

Calling at York, Leeds and Manchester would eat up an awful lot of XC's existing classic traffic.

From London to York:

London-Manchester 72mins
Manchester-Leeds 30mins
Leeds-York 15mins
Dwell at Manchester and Leeds total 5-10mins


Total: 122-127
Current best: London - York 111mins
You're creating an East West divide.

Well it beats the existing route to Leeds and is reasonably competitive to York.
I think it relieves the ECML pretty well!

You'll need to add 400m platforms in Leeds and this will require a new approach into Leeds, which will add considerable expense to NPR just as did HS2, you'll need the line Leeds- York, all of which was to be build by HS2.

Well you wouldn't necessarily need 400m platforms in Leeds.
You could operate ~325m (< 340m) trainsets into two platforms at Leeds, two at York and one in Newcastle.

Once you account for the loss of around a carriage to interior cabs in the 2x200m configuration, capacity wouldn't be that far reduced compared to a 400m double-set formation.

And HS2's proposal didn't provide a line from Leeds to York in any meaningful sense.
It functionally provided a line from Toton to York, bypassing Leeds.

EDIT:
Edited to make it in an order more comparable to the original posts.

 

[Mikey C]

I entirely understand not starting 2a now. But there's a big difference between completely cancelling something, and just pushing it back a few years. It would be stupidity to do anything now which prevented such a scheme going ahead in the future.

 

[Energy]

On Newsnight tonight it was reported that Rachel Reeves will say on Wednesday that HS2a to Crewe won't go ahead. The reasons given being 1. The Chiltern tunnels spent all the money and 2. The land has been sold. Not sure either of these is exactly true, but it's what Nick Robinson said she told a meeting of Labour MPs.

Apologies - I don't have a link. In any event the actual speech is in 2 days.

Speech has happened and HS2 was not spoken about.

Not particularly surprising, the speech was about growth, not mothballing infrastructure projects. It sounds like the meeting with Labour MPs has had significant paraphrasing.

Current expectation is that 2a will not happen till after phase 1 to allow for lessons to be learnt, and probably because the Treasury doesn’t want both bills at the same time.

 

[InTheEastMids]

I entirely understand not starting 2a now. But there's a big difference between completely cancelling something, and just pushing it back a few years. It would be stupidity to do anything now which prevented such a scheme going ahead in the future.

This seems like a very sensible point

Speech has happened and HS2 was not spoken about.

Not particularly surprising, the speech was about growth, not mothballing infrastructure projects. It sounds like the meeting with Labour MPs has had significant paraphrasing.

Current expectation is that 2a will not happen till after phase 1 to allow for lessons to be learnt, and probably because the Treasury doesn’t want both bills at the same time.

We can debate costs and benefits until the cows come home. However, instead these posts helped me to think about the politics of it all.

Look at what's happened with Crossrail - i.e. outperforming expectations and everybody basically saying "can't imagine life without it".

There's clearly a decent chance that people will really take to HS2 in the way that many have to HS1/Eurostar and the Liz Line (and most other new rail infrastructure).

At that point the capacity issues around Handsacre/Colwich/Shugborough become real, rather than imagined/modelled.
Rachel Reeves will be expecting it to happen sometime in what she hopes will be a 2nd Labour Government, when she probably also hopes to still be Chancellor or PM.

But if she cancels, she's set a trap for herself in - say 2032. Her 2025 decision to irrevocably cancel Ph2 re-emerges as a political issue, years after the actual cancellation. It would be a proof-point around an attack line that she/Labour know the cost of everything/value of nothing - i.e. she's an over-promoted accountant, not a strategic leader.

So if she/Labour *are* the strategic leaders they claim to be, then the political problem might actually be the reverse. They can see that Ph2a actually is a pretty good idea, but it's politically hard to say so, given the prevailing view in the country that Ph1 is a bit of a dog's breakfast.

 

[Krokodil]

If you look at the ODM data it is clear that you have to go very far down the destination list for York before you get a station south west of Birmingham.

I'm not surprised, Bristol to York is 4 hours wedged in a Voyager with XC's extortionate fares. Quite a lot of the passengers will be on split tickets so even those who are making the full journey will not appear in the statistics (instead appearing as two separate short journeys). Lengthening formations, cutting fares and cutting journey times would change this dramatically.

 

[stevieinselby]

Well you wouldn't necessarily need 400m platforms in Leeds.
You could operate ~325m (< 340m) trainsets into two platforms at Leeds, two at York and one in Newcastle.

Where are you getting 325m trainsets from? The HS2 sets will be 200m, with the option of running doubled up to form 400m trains where platform length allows.
The trains can't be redesigned to be longer than 200m because they are constrained by the size of the depot, which can only accommodate 200m trains, and to change that at this stage in the programme would be reeeeally expensive.

 

[BrianW]

Speech has happened and HS2 was not spoken about.

Not particularly surprising, the speech was about growth, not mothballing infrastructure projects. It sounds like the meeting with Labour MPs has had significant paraphrasing.

Current expectation is that 2a will not happen till after phase 1 to allow for lessons to be learnt, and probably because the Treasury doesn’t want both bills at the same time.

There was no need to mention HS2 at all, other than the reference to the 'bat tunnel' as an illustration of 'blockers at work'.

Hs2a will get attention 'in the fullness of time/ when the time is right'.

 

[HSTEd]

Where are you getting 325m trainsets from? The HS2 sets will be 200m, with the option of running doubled up to form 400m trains where platform length allows.
The trains can't be redesigned to be longer than 200m because they are constrained by the size of the depot, which can only accommodate 200m trains, and to change that at this stage in the programme would be reeeeally expensive.

More expensive than building the tens to hundreds of miles of high speed rail line necessary to make the 325m length relevant?

The cost of a depot is negligible next to that.
The cost of such a new depot, that would be needed regardless for such a large expansion of high speed rail operation, would be smaller than the cost of rebuilding Leeds station with 400m platforms alone.

Functionally new depots are regularly constructed for train orders that are a small fraction of the value, in total, of the project being proposed implicitly in this thread.

 

[fishwomp]

Functionally new depots are regularly constructed for train orders that are a small fraction of the value, in total, of the project being proposed implicitly in this thread.

Exactly.. the choice is vary the contract to adjust rolling stock length and depot length to match the need, or (a) use short 200m stock and provide lower capacity than currently - wasting everything, or (b) reconstruct railway throats in city centres to extend the inextensible..

 

[The Ham]

More expensive than building the tens to hundreds of miles of high speed rail line necessary to make the 325m length relevant?

The cost of a depot is negligible next to that.
The cost of such a new depot, that would be needed regardless for such a large expansion of high speed rail operation, would be smaller than the cost of rebuilding Leeds station with 400m platforms alone.

Functionally new depots are regularly constructed for train orders that are a small fraction of the value, in total, of the project being proposed implicitly in this thread.

Given that (at least partly) we're talking about competing with XC (which has most of their fleet at 100m to 125m units) a 200m unit will provide capacity uplift compared to a 2*4 coach train and quite possibly give a 2*5 coach train a run for is money if it doesn't beet it.

As to running London services via HS2, there could be a case for running 400m trains on the new lines and then splitting to serve two locations on the existing network.

 

[Fazaar1889]

So did she announce she's cancelling it then?

 

[FMerrymon]

As to running London services via HS2, there could be a case for running 400m trains on the new lines and then splitting to serve two locations on the existing network.

With the limitations as ooc and at handsacre/colwich, I think that's very likely they will need to split at Crewe. 8 trains an hour limitation at ooc, gives 5 going north of Birmingham. Will make for a potentially less reliable journey though.

So it easily wins versus the classic train.

Once you change from your service from the SW, no it doesn't.

If you look at the ODM data it is clear that you have to go very far down the destination list for York before you get a station south west of Birmingham. I haven't tried it for the other stations beyond York but I can't imagine it will be much different.

York is a major interchange for other destinations and we are talking about the entire South West, rather than specific stations on that line. Newcastle also, there's a reason express services on ecml call at these two stations. Just looking at specific york-somewhereSW isn't going to show you the demand.

Well you wouldn't necessarily need 400m platforms in Leeds.
You could operate ~325m (< 340m) trainsets into two platforms at Leeds, two at York and one in Newcastle

Its not the length of the platforms that's the primary concern. Leeds is full, requires new platforms and the current configuration is constrained. The benefit of hs2 was to create new platforms at a T to the current station, which added capacity for through services. If you're building new 325m platforms, might as well go ahead and build new 400m platforms. Whatever happens, Leeds needs expansion especially if you're building a new line across the pennines.

I'm not surprised, Bristol to York is 4 hours wedged in a Voyager with XC's extortionate fares. Quite a lot of the passengers will be on split tickets so even those who are making the full journey will not appear in the statistics (instead appearing as two separate short journeys). Lengthening formations, cutting fares and cutting journey times would change this dramatically

Exactly and the modal share of journeys along that route is likely low for rail as a result. The M1 following that routes had to be widened due to demand. Midlands Connect often included modal comparisons in their proposals. On the attached, they show Leicester-Leeds compared to Newcastle-Leeds. It wouldn't just be Leicester, or Leeds, in that state either either, there's a cluster of towns and cities that would have benefited. EM-Yorks/NE has a poor connection, but as it's not a London flow, people don't care.

We shouldn't go off just the current demand, but the potential to grow.

One thing that I wonder about HS2 Phase 2a is that there do not seem to be so many local objections to it compared to Phase 1 ?.

This group are/were quite active https://www.srcg.uk/. I believe they have contributed to Michael Byng's work, along with the original funders, and have appeared at the TSC as witnesses. I'd suggest filing under "blockers" in the Rachel Reeves definition of the word.

 

[Ben427]

Its not the length of the platforms that's the primary concern. Leeds is full, requires new platforms and the current configuration is constrained. The benefit of hs2 was to create new platforms at a T to the current station, which added capacity for through services. If you're building new 325m platforms, might as well go ahead and build new 400m platforms. Whatever happens, Leeds needs expansion especially if you're building a new line across the pennines.

There's not going to be a new line across the pennines, the IRP truncated it to a silly stub to the west of Standedge which provided no benefit. We'll get TRU and a few bits extra tacked on imo.

But Leeds does need new platforms longer term, and just as importantly approach lines. The problem is the station and city are very constrained along the E-W axis; one of the consequences of HS2 planning. There's space for a couple of extra platforms at the north west of the station behind platform 0 but that leaves the station with little or no car parking, plus the issue of picking up and dropping off of passengers which is already a massive issue. However the other issue there's no space for masses of new approach lines to the station without some expensive and tricky purchasing and demolition of housing.

 

[Meerkat]

But Leeds does need new platforms longer term, and just as importantly approach lines. The problem is the station and city are very constrained along the E-W axis; one of the consequences of HS2 planning.

Would it have enough platforms if it was quadrupled to the East so more trains could be through services?
Unfortunately they are replacing the bridge which would be the difficult bit with another two track one.

 

[Ben427]

Would it have enough platforms if it was quadrupled to the East so more trains could be through services?
Unfortunately they are replacing the bridge which would be the difficult bit with another two track one.

Nope - aside from quadrupling to the east is full of problems, both in the city centre but also further east. People keep bringing up four tracking through Garforth which is absurd when you consider the impact on the town and housing.

Additionally you're looking at ever increasing capacity from the midlands (which is needed) as well as to the west then that's not coming down Marsh Lane. At best you could put the LNER services via Hambleton but this causes connectivity issues for Wakefield which is a popular and profitable station.

Additionally it does nothing for the wider situation at the station which is the state of pick up/drop off and integration - which is network rail's responsibility.

 

[Northumbriana]

So there is no solution for Leeds?

 

[Ben427]

So there is no solution for Leeds?

There is but all of them have significant challenges both at the station plus the surrounding areas. There's no easy answers, HS2 and the station would have solved alot of them.

 

[Palmerston]

Does anyone know how much tunneling and bridging would be needed to extend from Handsacre to Crewe?

 

[Nottingham59]

Does anyone know how much tunneling and bridging would be needed to extend from Handsacre to Crewe?

There's a short tunnel near Whitmore, and I would guess fewer bridges per km than Phase 1.

There's a lot of complicated junction work just south of Crewe to allow HS2 trains to join the WCML towards Crewe station, allowing the main HS2 line to continue at 360km/h down to the portal of the tunnel taking the mainline under Crewe itself. This won't be needed if they don't go ahead with phase 2b.

Detailed maps are available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-and-profile-maps-west-midlands-to-crewe-2021

EDIT: This extract shows the scope of the civil engineering works that HS2 planned south of Crewe.


Grade separated junction off HS2; grade separated junction to join WCML; HS2 tunnel portal. All completely unnecessary.

 

[The Planner]

.
View attachment 174549

Grade separated junction off HS2; grade separated junction to join WCML; HS2 tunnel portal. All completely unnecessary.

Why?

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Why?

Because in all their posts they state HS2 is a waste of resources and want other projects instead.

 

[Class15]

Because in all their posts they state HS2 is a waste of resources and want other projects instead.

As this is the speculative forum, I think I’m allowed to say that it’s difficult to disagree with that viewpoint.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

As this is the speculative forum, I think I’m allowed to say that it’s difficult to disagree with that viewpoint.

I'm all for having discussions around what projects are worthwhile or not. But seeing the same anti-HS2 at all costs posts it's getting boring.

HS2 is progressing well (ignoring budgets) and I think most are hopeful that this is the start of the network and not a one-time half baked solution.

 

[CdBrux]

HS2 is progressing well (ignoring budgets) and I think most are hopeful that this is the start of the network and not a one-time half baked solution.

That's a pretty big ignore! You may also wish to ignore time as well?
I do though hope it is the start of a network, but cost control needs to get better. If that's going well in the next 2 or 3 years only then would I consider 2a to Crewe as giving a further opportunity to show they are getting better

 

[FMerrymon]

That's a pretty big ignore! You may also wish to ignore time as well?
I do though hope it is the start of a network, but cost control needs to get better. If that's going well in the next 2 or 3 years only then would I consider 2a to Crewe as giving a further opportunity to show they are getting better

Its not entirely all their fault. Covid was said to have hit them with an additional 1.7bn in cost. The government's rescheduling in 2023 due to inflation was reported by the NAO as adding £3.1bn (2019) to the project. 3 designs of Euston and now on to a 4th - dictated by the government. They're now adding the cancellation costs for phase 2 on to the budget for a total programme cost. They've had to work through significant increases in cost of materials and battle the environment agency which can stop work on a whim. Consider that the difference between the target cost and budget was 4.3bn.

I'm certainly not saying it's run perfectly and there are issues with hs2ltd, but some things have been unavoidable.

The damage is done in the minds of the public, who have been rather misled by the reporting of costs, so even if the government wanted to continue, it also needs to demonstrate to the public

 

[may032]

As a train nerd I love the concept of HS2, and there have been mitigating factors but they all seem to add 1bn here, 3-4bn there. The facts are that the cost has ballooned from around 40bn to 72-98bn (all 2019 prices), and that’s for less than half the original route. It’s not unreasonable to estimate that the ‘full’ thing would have been £150bn, almost x5 the original estimate. The original estimate was so poor it’s beyond comprehension.